The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on working practices of UK primary care optometrists

Clinical report: Virtual reality enables comparable contrast sensitivity measurements to in-office testing (pilot study)

SIGNIFICANCE

Vision health disparities largely stem from inaccessibility to vision specialists. To improve patient access to vision tests and to expedite clinical workflows, it is important to assess the viability of virtual reality (VR) as a modality for evaluating contrast sensitivity.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to assess the validity of a VR version of the Pelli-Robson contrast sensitivity test by comparing its results with those of the corresponding in-office test.

METHODS

Twenty-eight participants (mean ± standard deviation age, 37.3 ± 20.5 years) with corrected vision were recruited for testing on a voluntary basis with randomized administration of the in-office test followed by the VR analog or vice versa. Nineteen participants took each test twice to assess test-retest consistency in each modality. Virtual reality tests were conducted on a commercial Pico Neo Eye 2 VR headset, which has a 4K screen resolution. The environment for both tests was controlled by the participant for location and lighting.

RESULTS

Similar sensitivity scores were obtained between testing modalities in both the right (n = 28 participants; Wilcoxon match-paired signed rank [SR], p=0.7) and left eyes (n = 28 participants; Wilcoxon match-paired SR, p=0.7). In addition, similar test-retest scores were found for VR (n = 19 participants; Wilcoxon match-paired SR, p=1.0) or in-office (n = 19 participants; Wilcoxon match-paired SR, p=1.0) tests. Virtual reality Pelli-Robson results correlated well with in-office test results in variably diseased participants (n = 14 eyes from 7 participants, R2 = 0.93, p<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

In this pilot trial, we demonstrated that VR Pelli-Robson measurements of corrected vision align with those of in-office modalities, suggesting that this may be a reliable method of implementing this test in a more interactive and accessible manner.

TFOS Lifestyle: Impact of contact lenses on the ocular surface

Several lifestyle choices made by contact lens wearers can have adverse consequences on ocular health. These include being non-adherent to contact lens care, sleeping in lenses, ill-advised purchasing options, not seeing an eyecare professional for regular aftercare visits, wearing lenses when feeling unwell, wearing lenses too soon after various forms of ophthalmic surgery, and wearing lenses when engaged in risky behaviors (e.g., when using tobacco, alcohol or recreational drugs). Those with a pre-existing compromised ocular surface may find that contact lens wear exacerbates ocular disease morbidity. Conversely, contact lenses may have various therapeutic benefits. The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic impinged upon the lifestyle of contact lens wearers, introducing challenges such as mask-associated dry eye, contact lens discomfort with increased use of digital devices, inadvertent exposure to hand sanitizers, and reduced use of lenses. Wearing contact lenses in challenging environments, such as in the presence of dust and noxious chemicals, or where there is the possibility of ocular trauma (e.g., sport or working with tools) can be problematic, although in some instances lenses can be protective. Contact lenses can be worn for sport, theatre, at high altitude, driving at night, in the military and in space, and special considerations are required when prescribing in such situations to ensure successful outcomes. A systematic review and meta-analysis, incorporated within the review, identified that the influence of lifestyle factors on soft contact lens dropout remains poorly understood, and is an area in need of further research. Overall, this report investigated lifestyle-related choices made by clinicians and contact lens wearers and discovered that when appropriate lifestyle choices are made, contact lens wear can enhance the quality of life of wearers.

A Comparison of the Incidence and Type of Ocular Motility Defects in Patients Presenting to Birmingham Midland Eye Centre Emergency Department during 2019 and 2020 to Assess the Impact of the Covid-19 Pandemic

Aim:

This audit aimed to investigate whether COVID-19 had any impact on the incidence and type of ocular motility defects in patients presenting to Birmingham Midland Eye Centre (BMEC) Emergency Department (ED) during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 compared to the previous year.

Methods:

Medical records were reviewed for all patients presenting to BMEC ED during 2019 and 2020. Patients were classified depending on their diagnosis. The incidence and classification of ocular motility defect were analysed. Factors considered during analysis were number of presentations by year and month; COVID-19 tests; and pre-existing conditions.

Results:

Two hundred and twenty-one patients presented in 2019, and 260 patients in 2020, an increase in incidence of 17.6% was observed. One hundred and eighty-five patients were classified with new-onset neurogenic conditions in 2019, and 222 patients in 2020, an increase of 20.0%. In 2020, most patients presented in July, November, and December. Overall, there was a 91.3% increase in new-onset fourth cranial nerve palsies in 2020. Fifty-seven patients in 2020 had a Polymerase Chain Reaction COVID-19 test, of these 5 were COVID-19 positive.

Conclusion:

There was a higher incidence of ocular motility defects in 2020 compared to 2019. The majority of ocular motility defects were classified as neurogenic. It is difficult to attribute this increase to COVID-19 due to lack of testing and results, and confounding variables such as pre-existing conditions and lockdown restrictions. Some potential explanations for the change in presentations across the year of 2020 are proposed.

Protocol for a qualitative study to explore acceptability, barriers and facilitators of the implementation of new teleophthalmology technologies between community optometry practices and hospital eye services

INTRODUCTION

Novel teleophthalmology technologies have the potential to reduce unnecessary and inaccurate referrals between community optometry practices and hospital eye services and as a result improve patients' access to appropriate and timely eye care. However, little is known about the acceptability and facilitators and barriers to the implementations of these technologies in real life.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A theoretically informed, qualitative study will explore patients' and healthcare professionals' perspectives on teleophthalmology and Artificial Intelligence Decision Support System models of care. A combination of situated observations in community optometry practices and hospital eye services, semistructured qualitative interviews with patients and healthcare professionals and self-audiorecordings of healthcare professionals will be conducted. Participants will be purposively selected from 4 to 5 hospital eye services and 6-8 affiliated community optometry practices. The aim will be to recruit 30-36 patients and 30 healthcare professionals from hospital eye services and community optometry practices. All interviews will be audiorecorded, with participants' permission, and transcribed verbatim. Data from interviews, observations and self-audiorecordings will be analysed thematically and will be informed by normalisation process theory and an inductive approach.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval has been received from London-Bromley research ethics committee. Findings will be reported through academic journals and conferences in ophthalmology, health services research, management studies and human-computer interaction.

The impact of covid-19 on soft contact lens wear in established european and us markets

Purpose

To characterise changes in soft contact lens wearing habits during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

A detailed online questionnaire was circulated to individuals aged 40–70 years, during the period April to May 2021. Data sampling took place in the United Kingdom (UK), United States of America (USA), Netherlands, Germany, France, Spain and Italy. Only data pertaining to individuals who were soft contact lens wearers were included. Data were extracted for questions relating to contact lens wearing habits pre- and during the COVID-19 pandemic, and expectations for future lens wear beyond the pandemic.

Results

Seven-hundred and twenty-eight individuals were identified as soft contact lens wearers of which six-hundred and nineteen wore a combination of contact lenses and spectacles. Most respondents indicated contact lens wear times had either remained the same (57.3%) or increased (9.8%) during the pandemic. The country with the greatest proportion of respondents decreasing wear time during COVID-19 was the UK (45.3%), and the least in the Netherlands (20.0%). The primary cause of decreased lens wear was attributed to leaving the home less often (70.0%), and the second most common reason due to concerns about hygiene (10.8%). Most respondents (83.9%), however, expressed a desire to return to pre-pandemic wear times once the pandemic was over.

Conclusions

Practitioner concerns about contact lens market recovery ought to be assuaged by the survey outcomes which show most individuals to have maintained lens wear during the pandemic. In view of the continued lens wear, as and when restrictions ease, ECPs may wish to encourage patients to return for routine check-ups that may have been missed due to the pandemic.

Assessing optometric care delivered by telehealth during the COVID-19 public health emergency

Background:

The emergence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) forced many eye care providers to implement telehealth services while in-person visits were reserved for essential and/or emergency eye care.

Objective:

This study documents how an optometry group successfully implemented telehealth to care for patients during the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States.

Design:

Retrospective, comparative case series.

Methods:

Records were reviewed for patients seen in an academic optometry clinic from 23 March through 7 April 2020, the period of the Massachusetts stay-at-home advisory issued in response to COVID-19. Patients who completed telehealth visits were compared with those who received in-person care. Services delivered by telehealth included a check of symptoms, medication refills, health education, and assurance of future follow up. The study took into account the reason for each visit, as well as the rate of scheduled and completed follow-up appointments. Patient satisfaction with in-person care was evaluated by Press Ganey patient experience surveys.

Results:

Out of 855 patients scheduled, 421 patients completed telehealth encounters (49%), and 46 patients completed in-clinic visits (5.4%). A further 272 patients canceled appointments (32%), 123 patients were unable to be contacted (14%), and 8 patients declined care offered by telehealth (0.94%). Most patients who were cared for by telehealth returned to see optometrists (88%). By contrast, most patients who required in-person visits during this period were subsequently seen by ophthalmologists (58%, p < 0.001). Patient satisfaction remained high for in-person visits that took place during the COVID-19-related emergency, with improvements noted in patient satisfaction regarding ‘information about delays’ (47 % versus 100%, p = 0.007) and ‘concern for questions or worries’ (76% versus 100%, p = 0.037) compared with the same period 1 year prior.

Conclusion:

Optometrists rapidly embraced telehealth to deliver eye care to their patients during the COVID-19 public health emergency. Most eye issues were able to be addressed through telehealth; urgent eye problems were triaged and referred to the optometry clinic, when appropriate.

The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on working practices of UK primary care optometrists

PURPOSE

In late 2019, a new coronavirus capable of infecting humans, SARS-CoV-2, was identified in Wuhan, China. The resultant respiratory disease was subsequently named COVID-19. In March 2020, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, primary care optometry practices only remained open to deliver essential or emergency eye care. This study aimed to characterise the experiences of United Kingdom (UK)-based primary care optometrists during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

An email invitation to participate in an online cross-sectional survey was sent to 3000 UK-based, currently practicing members of The College of Optometrists (UK). Responses to the structured questionnaire were analysed using descriptive statistics, including frequencies, means and standard deviations. Frequency analyses were used to evaluate items with multiple responses. Free-text responses were examined using thematic analyses.

RESULTS

After data cleaning, a total of 1250 responses remained. Sixty-three percent were female, 70% self-identified as being of white ethnicity and 78% were based in England. During the first national lockdown, over half of all respondents were involved with the provision of remote consultations for emergency/urgent care. The majority felt 'very'/'moderately' comfortable conducting remote consultations, but 66% felt professional liability was increased. Forty percent were involved in the provision of face-to-face consultations. Eye-health and vision-related problems were the most commonly reported patient issues during both remote and face-to-face consultations, while contact-lens related problems were the least. Thematic analysis of the responses showed several challenges adjusting to the pandemic (e.g., working safely), but also some potential benefits (e.g., increased skills).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings provide an overview of changes to optometric practice in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic. The results may be used to inform the development of professional guidance and facilitate resource allocation for safe and effective eye care during this and any future pandemics.